ADFC Hamburg: ADFC calls for an end to illegal obligations to use cycle paths

Cyclists are still forced to use old, broken and dangerous paths with blue signs with a white cycle symbol. On the occasion of the 25th anniversary of the bicycle amendment, which came into force on 1 October 1998, the Allgemeiner Deutscher Fahrrad-Club (ADFC) is calling for these unlawful obligations to use cycle paths to be abolished and for a good cycling infrastructure to be established. BIKE spoke to Dirk Lau, press spokesman for the ADFC Hamburg.

Compulsory use of cycle paths - this is the legal situation

All paths marked with a blue traffic sign (cycle path or shared/separate footpath and cycle path) are subject to mandatory use. This means that cyclists must use them. Even if the signage is dubious. Exception: The path is objectively unusable (icy, badly damaged, blocked by parking offenders). According to a ruling by the Federal Administrative Court of 18 November 2010, "cyclists must always use the carriageway". Compulsory use of the cycle path may only be ordered if there is a particular danger due to the special local conditions. This is the legal situation in Germany - Our sister magazine TOUR has summarised more about this here.

BIKE: What do you consider "illegal obligations to use cycle paths"?

Dirk LauWe define illegal as an unlawful order issued by the police. Illegal because it contradicts what the law, what the Highway Code prescribes. The 1998 amendment to the Highway Code states that mandatory use of cycle paths may only be ordered if certain minimum requirements are met with regard to the quality and condition of the cycle paths. This has simply not been the case here for 25 years. In 1998, everything that looked like a cycle path was classified by the Home Office and the police as being subject to mandatory use. And since 1998, cyclists here in Hamburg have been arduously appealing against this. They have been partially successful, but it is a battle against windmills. We have examined all the main roads in Hamburg after 25 years and there are many that do not fulfil 100 percent of the minimum requirements. That means narrow, broken, old, poor traffic management.

What specific requirements for the mandatory use of cycle paths are not being met in Hamburg?

The typical Hamburg cycle path on a main road is one metre to 1.50 metres wide. There are cycle paths that do not even exist on main roads, but there is still a blue sign. This in no way corresponds to today's technical standards. Then there is the absolute inadequacy of the surface. Traditionally, paving stones are laid. These are not classic cobblestones, but brick-like, red stones, where everyone immediately swerves onto the smoother asphalt with their racing bike tyres if they are in their right mind. And many then switch to the pavement because it has smoother slabs. The width is out of the question in every respect and is a completely outdated standard from the sixties. The width is hardly ever adjusted.

Even with so-called basic repairs, this is hardly ever adapted, but if we are lucky, an additional brick is laid next to it. And then, of course, they have absolutely inadequate routing. They are directed to junctions and have to cross together with pedestrians, so they are slowed down every time. Especially if they are on a racing bike, it is not possible to cycle faster anywhere - at least not on the cycle paths that are designated as compulsory. These are the three major points of criticism we have, and of course the whole thing only makes sense if you look at it from a legal and road safety perspective. Road cyclists are also forced into the classic turning situations where they are all taken out of the field of vision of motorised traffic on cycle paths and then the dangerous right turn situation arises when the lorry or car then turns right.

Do the police not know the legal situation regarding the obligation to use cycle paths or do they have too car-friendly an image?

Here in Hamburg, unfortunately, we have the situation that the road traffic authority is part of the SPD-led Interior Ministry. And they don't really have the road safety of cyclists and pedestrians in mind, but have other criteria that they define themselves. These are yesterday's criteria such as the so-called ease of traffic or motor vehicle traffic flow. It is politically desirable for motorised traffic to flow and road safety aspects are not prioritised. The police actually have to prove the danger situation in order to order the compulsory use of cycle paths. There is no such case-by-case assessment here - the police would be busy until the next millennium. In our view, this is unlawful and the only solution would be to simply abolish them all across the board. At the same time, of course, a safe cycling infrastructure needs to be created.

If a cycle path is dangerous because of dirt or snow - do you have any feedback on what happens when you cycle on the road?

We recommend that cyclists ride on the cleared carriageway for safety reasons and to protect themselves. It's a classic: the carriageway is cleared first and, if we're lucky, the cycle paths are cleared too. Of course, this means that we don't recommend people to use the dangerous dirty or icy road. What happens then is of course also clear: many motorists go crazy. The more cyclists use the carriageway on main roads, the more aggressive some car drivers become. Because politicians and the police don't educate them: They're not doing it to annoy you, they're doing it for safety reasons and please realise that the road doesn't belong to you alone.

Every cyclist knows the situation: a cycle path with or without compulsory cycle lane use is not passable or too dangerous and you ride on the road. Then you are often coerced by motorists. Do we need an awareness campaign?

That's clear, it's not just a Hamburg problem. It's a nationwide problem, but we live in Germany, a car country.

What can I do as an individual cyclist against an obviously illegal obligation to use a cycle path?

lodge an objection. We as an association can do public relations work, but we can't sue, which is why we encourage and help people. By advising them on how to appeal against this order. This obligation to use cycle paths is a driving ban on the road and a restriction of their rights. All the lawsuits that we have supported and that I know of have been successful in court because it is simply so obvious that the minimum requirements prescribed by law are not being met. It just takes time to go to court and once the court has ruled, it takes time until something actually happens on the road and the sign is removed. It is a lengthy process.